Ford's Kill List

XS11E wrote in news:Xns97D89BFBAD65Cxs11eyahoocom@70.169.32.36:

Dude, you are truly stupid. If you had an ounce of brain in the rock you call a skull, you could've easily verified anything I said with a few simple searches.

The name is Nader; if you were trying for a pun (and a bad one at that) you certainly missed the boat big time.

Zombywoof wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

If I recall, it died with pretty much the same engine choices it originally had although there was an upgrade to the V6 as an option and as for the suspension, it was improved but still assembled from stock GM parts. How much Lotus had to do with it is open to question as GM didn't acquire Lotus until later... Supposedly the 1989 was the one that could have sold like hotcakes but it never made it to market, probably killed by the bean counters or who knows?

Joe wrote in news:Xns97D951B3B68DCnospamforme@216.77.188.18:

I have and it's all your (incorrect) opinion. The Corvair died because people didn't buy it, they didn't buy it because it was a truly dreadful car. It was on it's way out before Nadir wrote his book and proved how low journalism could sink.

My comments about the unsuitability of the design for modification were a major reason it died, as I pointed out, while Falcon and Valiant attracted buyers with V8 engines and lots of big car accessories the Corvair wasn't able to join the group which additionally reduced sales of the later years and that was reported and commented on by most of the trade magazines.

But you keep right on believing your fantasies, I'm sure you know so much more than people who were there....

"Unmatched handling" indeed, and you call me truly stupid? Obviously there are two possibilities, you never drove a late model Corvair or you never drove any other car.

XS11E wrote in news:Xns97D9E12FDA952xs11eyahoocom@70.169.32.36:

Now that's interesting. You say you've verified everything I said with a few searches, but then you say it's my opinion. Stupid? Yup.

BTW, opinions can't be incorrect by definition.

And this is fact as opposed to your opinion? LOL!

Uh, we basically agreed on this. It's not a point of contention. Hullo? Anybody home?

Your comments are basically uninformed opinion. You really don't have a clue as to what you're talking about. As an example, you mentioned "air conditioning". It's a simple fact that Corvairs had air conditioning. D-oh.

Too funny.

You betcha.

And here's where youre idiocy shines. I've driven over a dozen last-gen Corvairs and owned three of them at different points, two of which I built. I know these cars inside and out from first hand experience, and all of the ones I've owned would easily run rings around your Falcons and Valiants. I currently own a '93 5.0 LX with a few goodies, and it's a safe bet that any of my Corvairs would've easily outhandle a stock- suspensioned Fox Mustang.

So what do you _really_ know about Corvairs except what you read on the Internet?